324 JOURNAL OF THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
We are prone to fuse the heat of our own brain with the form of 
truth that passes through it, and it can even be psychologically 
demonstrated that no two men have, in the strictest sense of the 
terms, the same knowledge of the same thing j for if ideas are the 
result of sensible impressions, we know that the sensible impres- 
sions of each man depend on the impact of rays of light producing 
vibrations innumerable in the delicate nerve matter of the eye, 
which of course vary in each man. But passing that by, it is 
obviously in the interest of true Science that it be as far as possible 
dissociated in our minds from anything not inherent in it. 
There is certainly nothing in the bearing of Science on the great 
questions which most stir earnest minds to justify anything but the 
most modest bearing. When we consider how very far the most 
perfect knowledge of facts and relations must, from the sheer weak- 
ness of man's vision, fall below the actual contents of the universe, 
and how extremely obscure are the ultimate forms of truth arrived 
at in the last analysis of things, and what a subtle part the most 
untraceable of things are found to play in the structure of systems 
and the changes of life, it would seem that he who gives himself 
to search out such realities would of all men be very careful of not 
confounding strong statements with solutions of great problems. 
The propagandist of a theory is not necessarily the man of Science. 
The function of the observer and thinker ceases when eager advo- 
cacy of theories of the universe begins. John Stuart Mill, in his 
work on Liberty, expressed his conviction that " on any matter not 
self-evident " not more than one person in a hundred was capable 
of judging of it ; and certainly those who make special study of the 
processes of thought, and note the myriad forms of possible varia- 
tion in apprehension of the same thing, and the wondrous caution 
requisite in tracking a legitimate order of thought from remote 
premises to a comprehensive conclusion, will, while admiring his 
courage, think that his statement is a pardonable hyperbole. If 
there were any real gain to Science in winning over the undisci- 
plined in thought to the acceptance of certain hypotheses, by the 
indulgence in a form of language and a tone not bred of true 
Science, but of strong feeling, it would be reasonable to adopt such 
a course ; but the adhesion of crowds does not give solidity to a 
scientific conclusion, and that is what alone concerns Science. 
Those who enter the domain of Ehetoric, and throw passion into 
periods, and wit into epigrams, no doubt render an interesting ser- 
