’This, I think, is the direction in which the inference points, if we are careful to set out the logical conditions with complete impartiality.  But the ulterior question remains, whether, so far as science is concerned, it is here possible to point any inference at all:  the whole orbit of human knowledge may be too narrow to afford a parallax for measurements so vast.  Yet even here, if it be true that the voice of science must thus of necessity speak the language of agnosticism, at least let us see to it that the language is pure[18]; let us not tolerate any barbarisms introduced from the side of aggressive dogma.  So shall we find that this new grammar of thought does not admit of any constructions radically opposed to more venerable ways of thinking; even if we do not find that the often-quoted words of its earliest formulator apply with special force to its latest dialects—­that if a little knowledge of physiology and a little knowledge of psychology dispose men to atheism, a deeper knowledge of both, and, still more, a deeper thought upon their relations to one another, will lead men back to some form of religion, which if it be more vague, may also be more worthy than that of earlier days.’

Some time before 1889 three articles were written for the Nineteenth Century on the Influence of Science upon Religion.  They were never published, for what reason I am not able to ascertain.  But I have thought it worth while to print the first two of them as a ‘first part’ of this volume, both because they contain—­written in George Romanes’ own name—­an important criticism upon the Candid Examination which he had published anonymously, and also because, with their entirely sceptical result, they exhibit very clearly a stage in the mental history of their author.  The antecedents of these papers those who have read this Introduction will now be in a position to understand.  What remains to be said by way of further introduction to the Notes had better be reserved till later.

C.G.

FOOTNOTES: 

[1] p. 7.

[2] p. 173.

[3] See p. 110.

[4] But see an interesting note in Romanes’ Mind and Motion and Monism (Longmans, 1895) p. 111.

[5] Published in Truebner’s English and Foreign Philosophical Library in 1878, but written ‘several years ago’ (preface).  ’I have refrained from publishing it,’ the author explains, ’lest, after having done so, I should find that more mature thought had modified the conclusions which the author sets forth.’

[6] At times I have sought to make the argument of the chapter more intelligible by introducing references to earlier parts of the book or explanations in my own words.  These latter I have inserted in square brackets.

[7] p. 24.

[8] p. 28.

[9] p. 28.

[10] p. 45.

[11] p. 47.