326 
original material be supposed, as in the vortex atom theory, to 
be an incompressible fluid, what is the cause of its subsistence 
as such ? Our reason can give no account of this, and there- 
fore cannot accept it as a necessary truth. Or, if we adopt a 
theory like that of Boscovich, and substitute for material 
substance an infinite succession of centres of forces, that is of 
unknown causes arbitrarily changing their effects, to account 
for the results we observe in matter, this is, of course, to 
remove the whole question at once entirely out of the sphere 
of reason, and to make the -whole foundation of physical 
science purely empirical. 
24. We must conclude, therefore, that even as regards the 
phenomena of inanimate nature, while the value of physical 
science is very great in tracing in all directions the operation 
of orderly sequences of cause and effect, yet it can claim no 
authority for its conclusions as necessary truths, to which ex- 
ceptions cannot occur. It is the exponent of Reason only in a 
limited degree, as investigating the logical deductions which 
must follow, on the supposition of certain laws being assumed 
to be invariable, without giving us any certainty as to the 
universal truth of the assumptions. And this, which is suffi- 
ciently evident even as to the phenomena of inanimate exist- 
ences, is much more apparent when we consider those of 
organic life. Our knowledge in regard to this is, and must 
continue, purely empirical; and the conditions are here so 
variable and complex that it is impossible to attain to anything 
approaching that exactness and completeness, even as regards 
phenomenal laws, which science imperatively demands in the 
inorganic world. And it is certainly impossible to conceive 
any extension of human knowledge, by which these could be 
established as necessary truths. On this branch of the subject, 
however, it is unnecessary to dwell, for if material substance 
contains mysteries insoluble by reason, much more does 
life. 
25. (II.) The second of the grounds on which it is claimed 
that science should interfere with religious belief, viz., that as 
the result of physical science is to establish the universality of 
law, therefore there is no room left in the material universe 
for a governing will, it might seem unnecessary to examine 
here, since its fallacy has been often and sufficiently exposed. 
But one aspect of the question requires a brief notice, as it 
does not appear to have received the attention it deserves); 
I mean the evidence which physical science itself supplies 
or suggests, that law of itself leaves all the problems of 
the physical universe indeterminate, and that will must be 
premised in order to determine any of those particular solu- 
