hat it did this good
work by boldly observing and analysing facts; that this boldness
towards facts increased in proportion as Europe became indoctrinated
with the Jewish literature; and that, notably, such men as Kepler,
Newton, Berkeley, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Descartes, in whatsoever else
they differed, agreed in this, that their attitude towards Nature
was derived from the teaching of the Jewish sages. I believe that
we are not yet fully aware how much we owe to the Jewish mind, in
the gradual emancipation of the human intellect. The connection may
not, of course, be one of cause and effect; it may be a mere
coincidence. I believe it to be a cause; one of course of very many
causes: but still an integral cause. At least the coincidence is
too remarkable a fact not to be worthy of investigation.

I said, just now--The emancipation of the human intellect. I did
not say--Of science or of the scientific intellect; and for this
reason:

That the emancipation of science is the emancipation of the common
mind of all men. All men can partake of the gains of free
scientific thought, not merely by enjoying its physical results, but
by becoming more scientific men themselves.

Therefore it was, that though I began my first lecture by defining
superstition, I did not begin my second by defining its antagonist,
science. For the word "science" defines itself. It means simply
knowledge; that is, of course, right knowledge, or such an
approximation as can be obtained; knowledge of any natural object,
its classification, its causes, its effects; or in plain English,
what it is, how it came where it is, and what can be done with it.

And scientific method, likewise, needs no definition; for it is
simply the exercise of common sense. It is not a peculiar, unique,
professional, or mysterious process of the understanding: but the
same which all men employ, from the cradle to the grave, in forming
correct conclusions.

Every one who knows the philosophic writings of Mr. John Stuart
Mill, will be familiar with this opinion. But to those who have no
leisure to study him, I should recommend the reading of Professor
Huxley's third lecture on the origin of species.

In that he shows, with great logical skill, as well as with some
humour, how the man who, on rising in the morning finds the parlour-
window open, the spoons and teapot gone, the mark of a dirty hand on
the window-sill, and that of a hob-nailed boot outside, and co