81 
by using materialistic formulae, as the only formulae which will advance 
science. The spiritualistic formulae, he says, if true, will not advance science 
one bit. Now, it is not until the end of the paper that he attempts to get 
his hearers out of the slough of materialism into which he had purposely led 
them. Just as he says there is no such thing as vitality, he maintains there 
is no such thing as human thought, except the mere molecular action of the 
protoplasm of his brain, and the protoplasm of his hearers’ brains sitting in 
judgment on what he tells them. And yet he says that, after all, he is no 
materialist ; that materialism is utterly ineffectual ; and moreover that 
" systematic materialism may paralyze the energies and destroy the beauty 
of a life.” But he has no way of getting the people out of this slough of 
materialism, except by speaking contemptuously of all the higher and nobler 
branches of true philosophy. He says : — 
“ I bid you beware that, in accepting these conclusions, you are placing 
your feet on the first rung of a ladder which, in most people’s estimation, 
is the reverse of Jacob’s, and leads to the antipodes of heaven. It may 
seem a small thing to admit that the dull vital actions of a fungus or a 
foraminifer are the properties of their protoplasm, and are the direct results 
of the nature of the matter of which they are composed. But if, as I have 
endeavoured to prove to you, their protoplasm is essentially identical with, 
and most readily converted into, that of any animal, I can discover no logical 
halting-place between the admission that such is the case and the further 
concession that all vital action may, with equal propriety, be said to be the 
result of the molecular forces of the protoplasm which displays it.” 
We suppose we are coming to something definite here ; but he goes on to 
tell us, further on, that — 
“We can have no knowledge of the nature of either matter or spirit ; 
and the notion of necessity is something illegitimately thrust into the 
perfectly legitimate conception of law ; and the materialistic position, that 
there is nothing in the world but matter, force, and necessity, is as utterly 
devoid of justification as the most baseless of theological dogmas. The 
fundamental doctrines of materialism, like those of spiritualism, and most 
other { isms,’ lie outside 1 the limits of philosophical inquiry,’ and David 
Hume’s great service to humanity is his irrefragable demonstration of what 
these limits are. Hume called himself a sceptic, and therefore others cannot 
be blamed if they apply the same title to him ; but that does not alter the 
fact that the name, with its existing implications, does him gross injustice. 
If a man asks me what the politics of the inhabitants of the moon are, and 
I reply that I do not know ; that neither I nor any one else has any 
means of knowing ; and that, under these circumstances, I decline to trouble 
myself about the subject at all, I do not think he has any right to call me 
a sceptic. On the contrary, in replying thus, I conceive that I am simply 
honest and truthful, and show a proper regard for the economy of time. 
So Hume’s strong and subtle intellect takes up a great many problems 
about which we are naturally anxious, and shows us that they are essentially 
questions of lunar politics, in their essence incapable of being answered, and 
therefore not worth the attention of men who have work to do in the world. 
And he thus ends one of his essays : — ‘ If we take in hand any volume of 
divinity, or school metaphysics, for instance, let us ask, Does it contain any 
abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain 
any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence ? No. 
VOL. IV. G 
