are fundamentally identical, and may be expressed in relation to all
sorts of objects.

The attempt to mark religion off from the rest of life, to be approached
by special methods and in a special frame of mind, takes many forms, and
it may be illustrated by the manner in which it is dealt with by
Professor Arthur Thomson. In a little work entitled "An Introduction to
Science," and specially intended for general consumption, he remarks,
as a piece of advice to his readers:--

We would remind ourselves and our readers that the whole subject
should be treated with reverence and sympathy, for it is hardly
possible to exaggerate the august role of religion in human life.
Whatever be our views, we must recognise that just as the great
mathematicians and metaphysicians represent the aristocracy of the
human intellect, so the great religious geniuses represent the
aristocracy of human emotion. And in this connection it is probably
useful to bear in mind that in all discussions about religious
ideas or feelings we should ourselves be in an exalted mood, and
yet "with a compelling sense of our own limitations," and of the
vastness and mysteriousness of the world.

If Professor Thomson had been writing on "Frames of Mind Fatal to
Scientific Investigation" he could hardly have chosen a better
illustration of his thesis. One may safely say that anyone who started
an examination of religion in this spirit, and maintained it throughout
his examination, would perform something little short of a miracle did
he reach a sound conclusion. A feeling of sympathy may pass, but why
"reverence"? Reverence is a very complex state, but it certainly
includes respect and a certain measure of affection. And how is one to
rationally have respect or affection for anything _before_ one has
ascertained that they are deserving of either? Is anyone who happens to
believe that religion is _not_ worthy of reverence to be ruled out as
being unfit to express an opinion? Clearly, on this rule, either we
compel a man to sacrifice his sense of self-respect before we will allow
him to be heard, or we pack the jury with persons who confess to have
reached a decision before they have heard the evidence. It would almost
seem from the expression that while examining religion we should be in
an "exalted mood" that Professor Thomson has in view the last
contingency. For by an exalted mood we can only unders