304 
Thus it appears that the claim for a peculiar certainty 
advanced by the votaries of physical science,, is to a great 
degree imaginary. The certainty of the data does not involve 
the certainty of the conclusions. These stand on open 
ground^ where every candid reasoner has a right to think and 
judge for himself. It has been observed with wise caution; 
and with these words I conclude ; — “ The great majority of 
what are called sciences — that is; all those branches of 
knowledge in which discovery is possible — hardly deserve the 
name, being only a bundle of theories or facts; bound together 
with more or less exactness; and which a fresh discovery may 
any day untie . 33 
The Chairman. — I need hardly ask you to join with me in returning 
thanks to Mr. Garbett for his valuable paper. I only hope that it may 
elicit some discussion, and with that view I now call upon any gentleman 
who has any observations to make. 
Mr. Reddie. — Before the discussion commences I should like to ask the 
author of the paper what element he refers to as being common throughout 
the whole creation. I do not know whether he refers to the new thing 
called “ protoplasm.” 
Mr. Garbett. — I do not think I used that phrase at all. If you will find 
it in the paper I shall be obliged. 
Rev. C. A. Row. — I feel a considerable difficulty in entering upon this 
subject, from the fact that I have not yet seen the paper in print ; and a paper 
of this kind I should be sorry to attempt to discuss, unless I had had the 
advantage of reading it carefully beforehand, as I am certain that I could not 
do justice to it. There are one or two small matters, however, in the paper, 
which I will just mention with these few words of preface ; because I feel 
that I have no right to discuss a paper of this kind unless I have previously 
given it a careful looking through, as I should be in great danger of making 
mistakes. I think I agree generally with the purport of the paper ; but it 
strikes me that Mr. Garbett must admit this much : He has laid it down, 
and I fully concur with him, that there is a great importance in skill in 
every department of human thought. But I think he must also admit 
that though the physical philosopher may be the exclusive judge of facts 
because of his skill in investigation, we must extend that principle into the 
reasoning faculties as well. No doubt there are many persons who are really 
incompetent to judge of the processes of reasoning. The paper is rather loose 
there, because Mr. Garbett seems to lay down that most of mankind have an 
equal power in judging of reasoning and its conclusions. Here I think there is 
an unquestionable looseness, because it does not always fall to the observer of 
facts as facts to be able to reason accurately from them. Many people would 
have us believe that because they are clever at one thing they are also clever 
at another, — a conclusion which, in many cases, I altogether dispute. On 
pertain points which I have studied deeply I am entitled to give an opinion ; 
