168 
tions of science have taught us nothing whatever beyond that 
which has been, and is, equally cognisable in the absence of 
such investigations. It is true we have numerous brilliant 
examples of une langue bienfaite. But that is all. 
19. Let us now briefly summarise the more important points 
which the rapid survey just made has brought before us. They 
are these : — 
Two hundred and fifty years and more ago, the prevailing 
“ cast of thought ” in Europe generally was dominated by 
credulity and superstition. 
The science of that day, conforming to the prevalent 
opinions, partook also of their character. 
But, looking back from our present standpoint, we see that 
among the scientists who then lived there were some whose 
names are still respected, and whose authority continues to 
carry the very greatest weight and respect. 
And also that inquirers were honest, earnest men, zealously 
and steadily pursuing their “ researches ” in quest of truth. 
Yet that which by them was accepted as “ truth ” is now 
looked upon as “ extravagant theories,” and as “ fanciful 
philosophy,” with which men's minds were beguiled. 
At the present day, the prevailing cast of thought is ma- 
terialistic, and disbelief in whatever cannot be immediately 
appreciated by man's ordinary senses; the train of popular 
teaching is that all living things come from other living things 
quite different in kind, and that these become in their turn 
living things of a kind altogether different from what had 
previously been. 
In accordance with this form of thought, scientific theories 
of the day in regard to life and its manifestations are enun- 
ciated. 
And as in regard to the theories moulded by credulity and 
superstition, so with those on materialism and scepticism, 
men's minds are again beguiled with theories no less ex- 
travagant than were those of three hundred years ago. 
Belief in astrology is now relegated to the effete super- 
stitions of long-passed and unenlightened times. 
But whereas under a bygone phase of thought “philosophers” 
held that man had a sidereal body, so now it is field by 
“ scientists ” that future poets are “ potential in the sun ” ; 
that the energy of man and heat of the sun are but different 
expressions for one and the same thing ; that the foundations 
of life and organisation are directly connected with nebulous 
originals of suns and planetary systems. 
Thus the question naturally presents itself — Wherein lies 
the difference between the “fanciful philosophy” based 
