[12] Cf. Wicksteed’s The Religion of Time and the Religion of
     Eternity, in Carpenter and Wicksteed’s Studies in Theology.

[13] Eucken’s best account of this subject is found in Parts I., II., and V. of his Truth of Religion and in Beitraege zur Weiterentwickelung der Religion, pp. 240-281.  This latter is a volume of ten essays by well-known German religious teachers.

[14] The President of the British Association (1912) states in his address that it is not within his province to touch the question concerning the nature of the soul.  I take the report of his address from Nature, 5th September.  Dr Haldane goes much further in the direction of Vitalism (discussion at British Association on the subject).

[15] Cf. Driesch:  Philosophy of the Organism; Vitalismus als Geschichte und Lehre; his article in Lebensanschauung (a collection of essays by twenty German thinkers, 1911); Reinke’s Philosophie der Botanik; McDougall’s Body and Mind; Thomson’s Heredity, Evolution, and Introduction to Science (the two latter in the Home University Library).  Bergson’s Creative Evolution deals with the subject, but the value of this book is greater in other directions.  T.H.  Morgan’s Regeneration is a weighty contribution to the subject.

[16] A revival of the study of Kant’s first Critique would be of great value to our natural scientists.  Green, in his Prolegomena to Ethics, has interpreted this aspect in a manner that ought not to be forgotten. Cf. further Edward Caird’s Evolution of Religion, vol. i.

     [17] Ward’s Naturalism and Agnosticism, vol. i., is a reply to
     this important question.

     [18] Cf. Muensterberg’s Psychology and Education, and his
     Eternal Values; also Royce’s The World and the Individual.

     [19] This trans-subjective aspect has been worked out in an
     original way by Volkelt in his Quellen der menschlichen
     Gewisskeit.

     [20] The works of Muensterberg and Rickert deal with great clearness
     on this difference of subject-matter in science and history.

[21] The main weakness of Bergson’s philosophy seems to be in not recognising this problem.  Bosanquet, in his Principle of Individuality and Value, has very clearly recognised and interpreted it upon similar lines to Eucken.

[22] In this respect Eucken and Bergson seem to agree, although it is difficult to reconcile this aspect of Bergson’s with his statements concerning the grasping of reality in the perceptions of the moment.

     [23] “Hegel To-day,” The Monist, April 1897.

     [24] Truth of Religion, p. 328.