353 
into himself, and he will find that every serious thought implies 
a comparison of our thinking with something beyond itself, the 
informal and true always. We might even stake the argument 
for the a priori on this. This is the Cartesian ground. 
In this comparison of our particular reason with what we may 
describe ( ad hoc ) as the “ Absolute,” our reason is (1) conscious 
of itself, and then (2) commits itself to that external or absolute 
Reason, which also knows and is known as Reason ; otherwise it 
would not be Reason, but only “ fitness,” which is phenomenal 
The Self-consciousness of our reason is superior to, though 
inseparable from, our reason. It could not defer to the “ uncon- 
scious,” for that would not he reason. We defer to that absolute 
which, in reason, reality, and consciousness, is out of us, and 
immediately supreme, and felt by our mind to be so. 
And when we speak of Mind, we speak of all that mind 
implies. Intellectual movement, or our individual Moral cha- 
comparison of the particular conscious reason with the [bought as 
absolute conscious reason, is not intellectual only. For rightorwrong. 
we feel it to be right and wise ; and since it could not be resisted 
without a sense in us that we were wrong, our intellectual 
movement is therefore moral. An “idea” thus proves to be 
more than an individual fancy when Descartes uses the word. 
The necessary attributes of conscious and reasoning being 
should all be thought out from this beginning, if we would be 
thorough in our treatment. The intellectual power of any one 
may, (if this be established,) be graduated by its moral readiness 
to conform to the Absolute ; so that reason at its highest con- 
dition is evidently moral. Intellectual freedom, too, which per- 
tains to true intellectual power, is marked by readiness to 
compare at all times with the Absolute, in whatever way, (and 
there are many ways), it may be truly perceived. We slowly 
learn, more and more clearly, to subject our “ particulars ” to 
our “ universals,” and our own universals to the Absolute. It 
is in this the Cartesian argument needs fuller statement. 
53. There is often imagined to be a wider divergence than 
really exists between Plato and Aristotle on this viewS of 
whole subject. According to Plato, Noesis is prior Plato and Aris- 
to the simplest intellectual operation, as well as to totle ' 
the most perfect dialectic process. Essential Being, Reason, 
Consciousness, Good, are all anterior to the discursive reason of 
man. Aristotle assumes the Absolute, while he denies that our 
reason raises us to its perfect sphere — which, indeed, Plato never 
affirmed, nor could have affirmed. But we bow to it. 
54. If prae-phenomenal being be thus an absolute necessity of 
thought, then there is sure ground, however difficult, for that 
a priori argument, which may ultimately take a far more perfect 
